|
|
Message from England to Russia
Eric -
Greetings from one of your many neighbors.
I love playing Russia - it combines the diplomacy challenge of being a
central power with the tactical advantage of being an edge power. The best
of both worlds, if you like it like that.
I recognized your name from the Vermont Group so I went to the official site
to see how many we were. We are - get this - six. Every one of us but
Jason Bennett to your south. Wouldn't it be funny if he dropped out.
To get things started in c2 I imagine you will want to focus in the south.
I intend to try for Norway for a fleet, if that eases your mind, also I
would like to see you get Sweden & I will apply such pressure as I can to
make sure you get it.
Long term E and R can be terrific allies, with so many dots in between. So
let's bear that in mind & look out for each other's interest as things
develop.
Here we go!
Ben
Message from Italy to Russia
Good Afternoon Eric...
I hope that all is well.
You know .....IR is one of the strongest alliances on the board....
I am very intrested in working with you. Are we of a like mind here.
Andy
Message to all
Is this our Eric? playing Russia?
ID Email Name JDPR Rating JDPR
Games JDPR Rank
1791 ericg (at) mac.com Eric Goodman 1349.00 5
288 8 0 8.00
What is Jason's JDPR? I couldnt find him.
This must be our Benjamin:
ID Email Name JDPR Rating JDPR Games JDPR Rank RR Games RR Resignations
RR Ratio
6887 benjamin.harris (at) mindspring.com Ben Harris 1012.00 4 3835 4 0
4.00
Message from Germany to all
Greetings all, Just thought that I would let you know that I wish to solo
and that I hope to have a good time whilst doing so.
I will have to make Belgium my 18th SC as England has desires for it. It is
negotiable according to England but hey
if he wants it then I will take Beligium last. It wont matter then.
Anyone else have any wishes. If not then all just vote me the winner and we
can move on.
I am easy, if two of you have the same solo wish then hey lets compromise
;-)
May you all live for as long as you want and never want for as long as you
live.
Tony
p.s. Its bedtime here in holland (Ben its 00:03 a.m. now), will get back to
A,T, R tomorrow.
Message from Master to all
Players,
The game has now started, powers have been assigned and the opening
salvos have been fired. I think we've got a great group of players in
this game, so I'm sure it will be a great experience for all of you
and for our commentators.
One of our players will be gone for a week from the 10th to the 18th.
I'm hoping that we can complete our first year before that hiatus.
Just to let you know, right now we've got over twenty commentators. I
expect that a few more will trickle in over the next few days.
Also, each Spring, as early as I can, I'm going to broadcast the
following message. After the first few years, I might cut back to once
every second year. I just want to make sure no one forgets about this.
------------
Players,
Please keep in mind that if you'd like to share your plans, strategy
and whatnot with the commentators, you can do that by sending press to
yourself. That way the commentators will see your comments, but other
players will not. If you send "press to o", anyone can see your
comments by requesting a history of the game. If you send "press to
m", I will see your comments but the commentators will not.
You are not required to share information with the commentators, but
you are encouraged to do so.
Greg, GM
C2
-------------
I'd like to wish everyone the best of luck in the game - have a great
game everyone.
Greg, GM
C2
Message from Russia to all
>[Grey] Broadcast message in 'c2':
>Is this our Eric? playing Russia?
Da, dat's me, Tovarich. But watz wit' all the hush-hush secret
stuff? You messin' wit' me? Why doncha come out where's I can see ya,
huh?
--- Tzarface
Message from Russia to Italy
>Good Afternoon Eric...
And to you. Amusing that after talking with you about DipCon, we end
up in a game together.
>I hope that all is well.
Other than the Giants losing last night, I'm not complaining.
>You know .....IR is one of the strongest alliances on the board....
>
>I am very intrested in working with you. Are we of a like mind here.
This is a trick question, right? :) Absolutely, I'm interested.
Obviously for the short term I'm looking at getting Rum and jockeying
for position with AT, but RI cooperation can make that jockeying
easier for both of us.
For the moment I have no clear suggestions or requests, but I'll be in contact.
--- Tzarface
Message from Russia to Austria
Greetings Archduke Philippe,
How go things in the south? Austria is one of my favorite countries
to play. Most people seem to be daunted by it, but for some reason I
find the stress of the position comforting.
I'm pretty flexible in terms of my openings. If you would like, we
can bounce in Gal, or we can declare it a DMZ. Unsurprisingly, I'm
going to focus on Rum initially.
Longer term RA can be a very effective alliance, so long as we make
sure you don't get hit by Italy in the early going, and we get a
decent jump on Turkey so he can't hold out too long. What are you
looking to do?
I haven't heard from Turkey yet, and only got a short message from
Andy in Italy. While I've never played with Andy before, he has a
strong reputation, so I think he's someone to watch out for. Going
purely by JDPR I'm someone to watch out for as well (which is the
point I think whoever did the grey broadcast was trying to get at) so
I don't know what you think of me. The Turk to the south is not
someone I'm at all familiar with.
More later,
--- Tzarface
Message from Russia to Germany
Tony,
I am fully on board with the German solo angle. But I find that
misdirection works really well to set these things up. I suggest you
open Mun-Bur-Gas, Kie-Den-Nth, and Ber-Kie-Hol. I'll open
War-Sil-Mun, take Swe and go Mos-War-Sil. Then when I suddenly go
south, you'll mop up in the intervening confusion. The only downside
is that you might have to take Bel before you're at 18, but I'm
hoping you can be flexible on that point.
More seriously, I've read a lot of articles that claim that GR is a
dangerous combination for both players -- for Germany because Russia
is always "behind" him and for Russia because of the proximity of a
lot of Germany units and the "inevitable" clash in Scandinavia. My
experience (and I have a whole 2 games' worth to speak from!) is that
GR is very effective. With Russia sufficiently engaged in the south
and Germany in the west, it can be pursued with a relative minimum of
stress for both players.
So I'm hopeful that we can work together in the long term and am very
willing to discuss options for such cooperation. In the shorter term
I'd like us to agree to something simple like a DMZ in Pru and Sil. I
would also like to know your intentions with respect to Sweden. Of
course I expect to take it StP-Bal-Swe, but it's always nice to know
what the German player is thinking before making assumptions about
the success of such a venture.
--- Tzarface
Message from Russia to England
Hey Ben,
>I love playing Russia - it combines the diplomacy challenge of being a
>central power with the tactical advantage of being an edge power. The best
>of both worlds, if you like it like that.
Ironically, I do best with Italy and Austria. I've played Russia
before, and it usually leaves me feeling schizophrenic! But I do
enjoy the diplomatic aspect, and it makes it pretty hard for any of
my neighbors to ignore me.
>Every one of us but
>Jason Bennett to your south. Wouldn't it be funny if he dropped out.
If there's an AT vs. R going at the time, it would be hilarious. Not
so funny if it's RT vs. A though. :)
>To get things started in c2 I imagine you will want to focus in the south.
>I intend to try for Norway for a fleet, if that eases your mind, also I
>would like to see you get Sweden & I will apply such pressure as I can to
>make sure you get it.
Obviously both of those things are good to hear in central command.
Since I haven't heard boo from A or T to date, I have no idea what
I'm up to yet, but I certainly expecting a southern focus.
>Long term E and R can be terrific allies, with so many dots in between. So
>let's bear that in mind & look out for each other's interest as things
>develop.
Absolutely. Also because you'll have lots of fleets, and I won't have
many, it gives us lots of options for hassle-free cooperation. While
I will want *some* presence in Scandinavia there's lots of room for
us to work together to our mutual advantage.
--- Tzarface
Message from Russia to Germany
>Of course I expect to take it StP-Bal-Swe, but it's always nice to
>know what the German player is thinking before making assumptions
>about the success of such a venture.
Actually, considering legal moves helps as well! Obviously I meant StP-Bot-Swe.
--- Tzarface
Message from Russia to France
Erik,
Great, now I'm in *two* games with players named Eri(c|k). Keeps
things nice and confusing. Think we can get EG to send us misdirected
press is we alternate how we sign our press. :)
I'm a talkative player and I like to keep in contact with people
across the board as well as nearby ones. I guess the good thing about
Russia is that it gives most players a reason to want to talk to me
-- whatever you plan to do, there's room for RF cooperation against
either E or G. Especially if either of us ends up on the wrong end of
EG cooperation, it will do us good to be able to make sure the other
doesn't get wiped out to keep those guys honest.
--- Tzarface
Message from Russia to Turkey
Sultan Jason,
Greetings from the north. So what's your pleasure? Bounce in Bla?
Steamroll to the west? Some combination?
I've heard only the barest peep from our mutual westward neighbors so
have no idea what they are planning. Andy's a player of some repute
-- more a FtF player I gather, but still someone that judge players
are quite in awe of. Philippe's name is very familiar sounding to me,
but to be honest, I know little of him as a player and don't have
time at the moment to do any research. I'm a fairly new player -- at
least in number of games played. I did well in my first two (newbie)
games, and have had mixed success and failure since. How about you?
You've got the benefit of a nice corner position, but the downside is
that RIA frequently head straight for it in some combination, and you
need some hard to acquire units to get you a real defense. A
juggernaut can be quite effective for both of us, getting us both
started and headed west pretty quickly, me with enough northern
forces to make a show in Scandinavia, you with enough fleets to hold
off the inevitable Italian swarm.
Let me know what you think of things and how you'd like to cooperate.
While we have some time before we need to really commit to anything,
I find it's always nice to have done some talking before the
you-know-what hits the fan.
--- Tzarface
Message from England to Russia
Mr. Face -
> >Every one of us but
> >Jason Bennett to your south. Wouldn't it be funny if he dropped out.
>
> If there's an AT vs. R going at the time, it would be hilarious. Not
> so funny if it's RT vs. A though. :)
Interesting you say that. I think you *have* heard from Austria. I think
he sent our anonymous broadcast, calling us out with our modest jdpr's. I
have a laundry list of reasons & will share some of them if you don't mind.
#1 on the list is that it appears to have been written by someone for whom
English is a second language. Philippe Bergeron, perhaps? Another note
about our Austria - I was intrigued to see that his JDPR is what it is
because he has, in a relatively small number of games, one solo. Four
losses, one 4 way draw, and one solo. As - coincidence? - Austria, in a
game that appears to have been (judging by average jdpr of 960) for
newbies. Wouldn't that describe perfectly the person who would send just
such a grey broadcast? Just thinking out loud, of course it's not really
important anyway. . .
> --- Tzarface
I *love* this. Excellent choice.
Ben
Message from England to all
> This must be our Benjamin:
> Ben Harris 1012.00
I just want to point out, that my JDPR is within several percentage points
of Andy's, at 1085. Therefore I am pretty much as good as Andy Bartalone,
who is well known in some circles as a player who uses ellipses very
frequently. . .
Also I want to point out that Greg's JDPR of 1431 is highest of all of us,
and I think we should gang up on him and fix the game settings so we all
solo.
Finally I want Tony to know that Belgium is his, if he will but send me a
case of that weird fruit flavored beer they have there.
Thank you.
Ben
Message from France to Russia
>
> Great, now I'm in *two* games with players named Eri(c|k). Keeps
> things nice and confusing. Think we can get EG to send us misdirected
> press is we alternate how we sign our press. :)
Clearly, with names like ours, we're destined for greatness. The non-
Eric|ks of the game will crumble beneath our bisyllabic power.
Seriously, I'm glad to see that we're on the same page with EG. I've
always felt that FR have a tremendous ability to keep their neighbors
caged in and playing off one another, and I've done and seen it happen in
game after game. We're obviously not dealing with novices in this game,
but I'd really like to make a concerted effort to work with you to
maintain some leverage against these two.
I've already heard from both of them; Tony's style seems to rub Ben a
little wrong, which I think is an excellent sign. Let's hope that Belgium
broadcast, while clearly made in jest, gave Ben at least little case of
the heebie-jeebies.
I can't say I know much about the rest of your neighbors, though I'm very
familiar with Andy. I'm hoping to hear from the rest of them soon.
Erik
(note the correct spelling)
Message to all
> >[Grey] Broadcast message in 'c2':
> >Is this our Eric? playing Russia?
>
> Da, dat's me, Tovarich. But watz wit' all the hush-hush secret
> stuff? You messin' wit' me? Why doncha come out where's I can see ya,
> huh?
No.....Eric Hunter played Russia in the first game...not Eric Goodman...
But Eric is every bit as good as his namesake.
Message from Italy to all
>
> > This must be our Benjamin:
> > Ben Harris 1012.00
>
> I just want to point out, that my JDPR is within several percentage points
> of Andy's, at 1085. Therefore I am pretty much as good as Andy Bartalone,
> who is well known in some circles as a player who uses ellipses very
> frequently. . .
Be careful what you say.....everyone here knows that I suck at this game.
> Also I want to point out that Greg's JDPR of 1431 is highest of all of us,
> and I think we should gang up on him and fix the game settings so we all
> solo.
Ok....I dont want to be part of that.....see Greg...I am not a
mutineer...:-)
> Finally I want Tony to know that Belgium is his, if he will but send me a
> case of that weird fruit flavored beer they have there.
That would be Lambic.
Message from Italy to Russia
Eric,
>
> And to you. Amusing that after talking with you about DipCon, we end
> up in a game together.
I thought so.
> >I hope that all is well.
>
> Other than the Giants losing last night, I'm not complaining.
Thats good.
> >You know .....IR is one of the strongest alliances on the board....
> >
> >I am very intrested in working with you. Are we of a like mind here.
>
> This is a trick question, right? :) Absolutely, I'm interested.
Excellent.
> Obviously for the short term I'm looking at getting Rum and jockeying
> for position with AT, but RI cooperation can make that jockeying
> easier for both of us.
I think its easier on both of us if we convince T to help us with A, and
then wipe the floor with him, but that would mean convincing EF to keep
Tony busy while this goes on, which I have faith in as long as I am not
attacking France. I can help push those buttons.....have you heard from
England.
take care
Andy
Message from Turkey to all
Good to hear from everyone. I'm afraid I don't have a JDPR, although
it's not for lack of trying! All my games have completed since Jan 1 of
this year.
Looking forward to it....
jason
Message from Turkey to Russia
Thanks for your quick and incisive note.
For starters, I'd prefer to bounce in Bla, if only to build up trust
between us. We can also head west, although we should keep any alliance
between us under wraps for as long as possible. Nothing galvanizes the
other powers as much as the cry of "Juggernaught!"
Austria hasn't said a thing to me yet, so I doubt he's talked with Italy
and Germany. I'll make sure to say hi and feel him out.
I assume we'll head for our usual positions in the first year and let
things ride from there. I assume you'll bounce in Gal with Austria to start?
jason
Message from Russia to all
> > >[Grey] Broadcast message in 'c2':
> > >Is this our Eric? playing Russia?
> >
> > Da, dat's me, Tovarich. But watz wit' all the hush-hush secret
> > stuff? You messin' wit' me? Why doncha come out where's I can see ya,
> > huh?
>
>No.....Eric Hunter played Russia in the first game...not Eric Goodman...
>
>But Eric is every bit as good as his namesake.
Lemme 'splain, 'cuz youse havin some trouble gettin' dem fax straight, see.
#1- I'm Eric. That other Eric, I'm his namesake. Just 'cuz he's been dippin
longer dan me an doin bedder dan me don't make him da original guy.
#2- Da first inkwyry was askin' if da' guy playin' Russia (dat's me,
comrade) is da same guy whatz got da ID dat he showed in da broadcast.
Since I'z da guy what used ta have da "@mac.com" moniker, he was inkwyrin'
about me, not dat udder Eric guy.
#3- Since I'z da one what said I'z da' guy what da udder guy was askin'
about, whatcha' doin' contradiktin' me in fronna' my whole family fer?
Alla dis disrepectin, an ya ain't even got da constatushun ta come out an
talk ta me face ta face. Sheesh! Watz da world comin' to, anyway?
--- Tzarface
Message from Russia to England
>Interesting you say that. I think you *have* heard from Austria. I think
>he sent our anonymous broadcast, calling us out with our modest jdpr's. I
>have a laundry list of reasons & will share some of them if you don't mind.
Well, FWIW, I *still* haven't heard from Austria, so if it was him, he's
doing a good job of hiding it. Germany's another possibility because if
we're going to get into JDPR-biasing, his is basically the same as mine.
> > --- Tzarface
>I *love* this. Excellent choice.
:) I must admit that I did amuse myself with that choice, too. Problem is
that I don't really know anything about the real Scarface character (I saw
the Pacino movie ages ago, but don't remember anything but violence).
A quick web search of Scarface sites shows that I can only use movie quotes
if I *really* want to piss people off. Apparently the character says "f***"
like every third word. I toned it down to "messin'" in the one I used. Of
course in that movie, Scarface was also Cuban, which makes the whole
Italian theme questionable, but in my defence, Howard Hawks made a version
in the '30s where Scarface was a Chicago mobster.
I just hope I haven't offended every non-native-english speaking observer
and player by using a potentially insulting stereotype!
--- Tzarface
Message from Russia to France
Hmm. I've only heard from England unless you count the German broadcast.
That doesn't seem like a good thing!
Do you want to approach EG with any particular strategy, or just play it by
ear for now?
Sorry, I was going to write more, but I'm being told I'm staying up too
late! More later.
--- Tzarface
Message from Russia to Italy
>I think its easier on both of us if we convince T to help us with A, and
>then wipe the floor with him, but that would mean convincing EF to keep
>Tony busy while this goes on, which I have faith in as long as I am not
>attacking France. I can help push those buttons.....have you heard from
>England.
Yes, I've heard from him. So far nothing more than general pleasantries,
but it appears there's potential for cooperation there.
Out of curiosity, do you think ITR vs. A makes more sense from a tactical
point of view, or is it something about Phillipe specifically?
--- Eric
Message from Russia to Turkey
>I assume we'll head for our usual positions in the first year and let
>things ride from there.
Sounds good. Not bouncing causes all sorts of sirens to go off anyway, as
you note.
>I assume you'll bounce in Gal with Austria to start?
Have not heard from Austria, so do not know. Not knowing, cannot say.
(Sorry, B5 allusion there).
We'll see what he asks for. If he requests a DMZ rather than a bounce, then
I'll have to consider it. But I'm ceratinly expecting a bounce.
Gotta run for now. More later!
--- Eric
Message from Germany to Russia
Hello Tzarface,
>More seriously, I've read a lot of articles that claim that GR is a dangerous combination for both players -- for Germany because Russia is always "behind" him and for Russia because of the proximity of a
lot of Germany units and the "inevitable" clash in Scandinavia. My experience (and I have a whole 2 games' worth to speak from!) is that GR is very effective. With Russia sufficiently engaged in the south
and Germany in the west, it can be pursued with a relative minimum of stress for both players.>
Aahh stress, indeed something to be avoided. With a friendly GR Russia even has the luxury to exploit possibilities in the north. My gut feeling combined with signals received from AI tells me that RT will do ok in the south. I would like you to consider a northern approach with MOS going to STP. The more you grab in the north, the lesse you need in the south/south west to solo.
> So I'm hopeful that we can work together in the long term and am very willing to discuss options for such cooperation. In the shorter term I'd like us to agree to something simple like a DMZ in Pru and Sil. I
would also like to know your intentions with respect to Sweden. Of course I expect to take it StP-Bot-Swe, but it's always nice to know what the German player is thinking before making assumptions about
the success of such a venture.>
A logical set of moves for the fleet in STP. I would ofcourse prefer to see the fleet move onto NWY. This could be achieved by spring next year as the army in STP would force england to use NTH/NWG to take sweden. If STP were then to move to Finland then a fleet build in STP will have you on your way into Sweden and the NWG. With two fleets facing England. If Austria moves against you then I would come to your aid. I think a move to UKR from WAR and MOS to STP will still ensure that Austria wont go for WAR even if he makes it to GAL. Push for a DMZ in GAL. With the eternal bounce in BLA along with my offered support if you get into trouble with Austria would leave us free to concentrate on England and scandinavia.
Just a few thoughts. Lets do our rounds and evaluate what we have heared and take appropiate steps from there. So far I have only been asked to bounce in Sweden should the situation call for it. This came from Austria, this is what leads me to belive that you would be able to arrange a DMZ in GAL and work together with me in the north. I will talk to Austria and point out the RG cooporation talks and inform him that if he does move on GAL once agreeing on a DMZ that I shall have to come to your aid.
Message from Germany to all
> Finally I want Tony to know that Belgium is his, if he will but send me a
case of that weird fruit flavored beer they have there.<
Ah, you mean a case of the "forbidden drink", consider it done. Thank you for giving me BEL as my 18th center.
Message from Italy to Russia
> Out of curiosity, do you think ITR vs. A makes more sense from a tactical
> point of view, or is it something about Phillipe specifically?
I have never shared a board with Phillipe, I just know him by reputation
and the Turk is a newbie....I think we can get his help with Phillipe and
then get rid of him. Easiest path to success.
Message from Germany to Russia
Hello again, well I have heared from everyone now. AT give the impression that they are friendly towards you so it looks like you will be attacking yourself. Austria is trying to fish out where me fleet is going, England and or France have no doubt asked for this information. Italy states that he hasnt heared from Austria.
Any news your end?
Message from Austria to Russia
Greeting Tzarface,
> How go things in the south? Austria is one of my favorite countries
> to play. Most people seem to be daunted by it, but for some reason I
> find the stress of the position comforting.
I suppose that as long as you can survive the early years,
you do get to enjoy the same game as everyone :-)
> I'm pretty flexible in terms of my openings. If you would like, we
> can bounce in Gal, or we can declare it a DMZ. Unsurprisingly, I'm
> going to focus on Rum initially.
Personaly, I would prefer to declare it a DMZ and learn
as soon as possible whether you can be trusted or not,
wich is usefull to know if we are to be working together;
but I did take the precaution of asking Tony about
bouncing you in Sweden if things turn sour.
> Longer term RA can be a very effective alliance, so long as we make
> sure you don't get hit by Italy in the early going, and we get a
> decent jump on Turkey so he can't hold out too long. What are you
> looking to do?
>
> I haven't heard from Turkey yet, and only got a short message from
> Andy in Italy. While I've never played with Andy before, he has a
> strong reputation, so I think he's someone to watch out for. Going
> purely by JDPR I'm someone to watch out for as well (which is the
> point I think whoever did the grey broadcast was trying to get at) so
> I don't know what you think of me. The Turk to the south is not
> someone I'm at all familiar with.
I think it's too early for me to be making plans. A Lepanto
on Andy's part sure is something I look forward to, but I
will be sending my fleet to Ven to make sure his final choice
doesn't have anything to do with an early invasion of Austria.
Regards,
Philippe
Message from England to Russia
Mr. Face -
> Well, FWIW, I *still* haven't heard from Austria, so if it
> was him, he's doing a good job of hiding it. Germany's
> another possibility because if we're going to get into
> JDPR-biasing, his is basically the same as mine.
As I've said I don't think it's a big deal, though I agree Germany is the
other possibility. I wonder whether you overlooked this from Germany's
opening broadcast, some sixteen or so hours ago:
> p.s. Its bedtime here in holland (Ben its 00:03 a.m. now),
> will get back to A,T, R tomorrow.
So apparently *someone* heard from Austria yesterday.
> I just hope I haven't offended every non-native-english
> speaking observer and player by using a potentially
> insulting stereotype!
Well, there's always gunboat. ;o)
Ben
Message from Italy to Russia
Eric,
Philippe seems to be scared to death of me, please cut his heart out.
Message from Russia to Germany
Got your messages.
I strongly appreciate your offer of support should Austria head to Gal
after declaring it a DMZ.
Indeed I did get a friendly message from Austria not too long after I got
yours. He's asked for a DMZ in Gal as you have suggested he would, so I'm
likely to agree. While the northern opening idea is intriguing, a Gal DMZ
leaves me open to potential nastiness, so I'm a bit loathe to send my
forces north until I see that the DMZs in Gal, Pru and Sil are being
honored. Speaking of which, you never agreed to my proposed DMZ in Pru/Sil,
nor did you say what your intentions were in Swe at this point.
At this point I am more likely to consider building in the north if things
go well in the south than making a strict northern opening and trusting
that everything in the south and west is going to go well. But I will keep
you up to date as the situation evolves.
--- Tzarface
Message from Russia to England
Well Germany and Austria got back to me, and I must admit that the timing
and content of their messages makes me suspicious. I'll let you imagine the
tactical details of why I say this, but overall their combined proposed
moves would leave me in a really bad position should they cooperate to take
advantage of it.
Or maybe I'm just being paranoid.
More later.
--- Tzarface
Message from Russia to Austria
>Personaly, I would prefer to declare it a DMZ and learn
>as soon as possible whether you can be trusted or not,
>wich is usefull to know if we are to be working together;
>but I did take the precaution of asking Tony about
>bouncing you in Sweden if things turn sour.
Fair enough. So for now let's plan on it being a DMZ. I also like the
opportunity to develop some trust early on. I do understand that a bounce
could be a resource strain if you are also looking to bounce with Ven.
We can confirm DMZ vs. bounce in a day or so after we've had a chance to
hear more from our neighbors. Sound good?
--- Tzarface
Message from Russia to Turkey
Okay,
Finally heard from Austria. He has requested a DMZ, so I'll likely go with
that, though it means I'll need to be a little cautious in case he tries to
take it. So I'll probably set up to take Rum while still having a good shot
at defending War if necessary.
Sound good? I'll be in touch some more as the week rolls on, but just
wanted to keep you up to date on my planning.
--- Tzarface
Message from Russia to Italy
That was my guess, having heard Phillipe's name before and seeming to
recollect that he's a good player. Sounds good to me. For now I won't be
doing anything unusual, and I doubt there's much move-wise you need to do
either, so we can just spend some time trying to set up the right
circumstances north and south for RI to work. I've heard from GA and T now,
and it seems very doable. Of course, it always seems easy before anyone has
actually moved....
Keep in touch and I'll do the same.
--- Eric
Message from Austria to Russia
> We can confirm DMZ vs. bounce in a day or so after we've had a chance to
> hear more from our neighbors. Sound good?
Yes, perfect. How are things going in the north?
Philippe
Message from Germany to Russia
Hi Tzarface.
Austria is a little paranoid but by the sound of it the DMZ has his thumbs
up.
The reason I never mentioned SIL/PRU is because that would be the least of
my problems. I wanted to get the message of RA over first. We have plenty
of time. I have never opened to SIL/BOH as Germany nor have I ever seen
WAR - BOH. It goes without saying that I have no problems with SIL/PRU and
just for the record would like to add BOH.
In the initial stages me attacking you would be suicide with FEAI all around
me waiting to move on any weak power. I would just be strecthing my forces
and allowing England/France to grab the lowlands and scandinavia.
We did speak of Sweden. I would have no reason to prevent your build unless
you were hostile towards me in the spring. Something I know wont happen. So
yes, sweden is yours. I recall stating that I even want Sweden to carry on
to Norway. Lets take it one step at the time. I dont mind sending an RA
message about GAL and will do so immediately.
Lets keep talking. Nothing new yet from England or France or Turkey, or
Italy or Austria.
Tony
Message from Germany to Austria, Italy, and Russia
Hi guys, seperately we speak of having interest in a DMZ in GAL, TYR, SIL,
BOH, PRU. I feel we need reassuring that this is the case. As we are working
on plans for all 4 of us then maybe all of us should agree that if one of us
doesnt stick to a DMZ (GAL/SIL/PRU/BOH/TYR) then the remaining powers will
come to each others aid.
Its war and there are seven powers, we need to start hammering out a code of
conduct to ensure future colaboration.
We need to knock the number of powers down asap and ensure we have a broad
alliance to do so. So far GIA have been trying to coordinate plans. So has
Austria and Russia and Germany and Russia. With Russia on board then we can
at least build on a 4 some to start off with.
This leaves EFT as the targets. Something which should suit all of us as
they are in remote corners in relation to the 4 of us. With 3 of us pounding
Turkey, two of us pounding England, and two of us pounding France then we
run little risk.
A well coordinated 4 way alliance right now would minimize our risks. To
further enforce our strategy Russia and Germany need to make concrete plans
in the north. As does Germany Italy in the west. The three of you can easily
coordinate against biddy widdy Turkey in the corner.
Even the intention to work together and sticking to open communication is a
big step forward. Overcome paranoia and lets get this spring 1901 move off
to a good start for the 4 of us. Let me know guys. Press all 4 of us. The
more we talk openly the mopre we coordinate and can help each other overcome
initial reservations.
Tony
Message from England to Russia
Mr. Face -
> Well Germany and Austria got back to me, and I must admit
> that the timing and content of their messages makes me
> suspicious. I'll let you imagine the tactical details of
> why I say this, but overall their combined proposed moves
> would leave me in a really bad position should they
> cooperate to take advantage of it.
According to Andy our Germany is hell on wheels, so watch your back. I was
going to mention to you, that when you happen to have your fleet in Sweden
F'01, we may be able to find some good things to do with it in '02, looking
forward. Profitable & stabilizing for you, you know. And a start toward
sharing the dots between us. . .
> Or maybe I'm just being paranoid.
You are not paranoid. Everyone is out to get you.
> More later.
I look forward to it - I enjoy your press.
Ben
Message from Italy to Russia
Eric,
It appears that the Austrian might be going full bore defensive on the
first turn.
Bouncing in GAL and attacking Venice.....if I can get this confirmed...
I have a plan....it involves unwanted supports and Italian armies in
the lower balkans....
How are your talks with the Turk going?
Andy
Message from Germany to Russia
An EFG press is being initiated. I will let you know the outcome. So far
England has only indicated a sit back wait and see attitude. I will keep you
abreast of developments.
Message from France to Russia
Eric:
My only specific plan right now is to make absolutely certain that an EG
alliance doesn't form. Since EG is bad news for you, too, I'd only ask
that you do everything in your diplomatic power to discourage it.
I think the early alliance structure will pan out shortly over here; at
this point, I'm favoring England, but I can say for certain in the next
couple of days. In any case, I would want to discuss getting you in place
to work against the survivor of the opening between those two. If there's
a quick war here in the west early, you've got time to resolve the south,
grow a bit, and be ready to swoop in and take on the surviving E or G with
me.
Of course, you may be interested in an anti-German or anti-English
opening off the bat, and that could change my plans completely. Please let
me know, if possible, if you're headed in that direction.
Austria and Italy seem cozy, but that's about all I have to offer. Any
info you can pass my way would be appreciated.
Erik
Message from Turkey to Russia
Thanks for the update. Good luck keeping Austria in his place.
jason
Message from Russia to France
Erik,
>Since EG is bad news for you, too, I'd only ask
>that you do everything in your diplomatic power to discourage it.
EG doesn't sound likely so far, but I'll keep stoking whatever fires I can.
>Of course, you may be interested in an anti-German or anti-English
>opening off the bat, and that could change my plans completely. Please let
>me know, if possible, if you're headed in that direction.
I don't have any immediate anti-E or anti-G plans (as in, War-Sil, or
Mos-StP). I have the distinct impression that there has been some
significant central triple discussion going on, and in that sense, I
wouldn't be disappointed to see Germany fall fairly quickly, however.
By turns I hear that AI are bosom buddies and then that they are completely
at each others' throats (either of which is pretty impressive for so early
in the game!) FWIW, from what I hear Andy/Italy will be leaving you alone
and focusing east. If true, that should give you flexibility to be fairly
bold vis-a-vis Germany or England.
--- Tzarface
Message from Russia to Turkey
Sultan Jason,
I'm getting more and more interested in RT cooperation as I get hints of
what's going on to the west. What's your take on things? Do you mind
sharing your thoughts on how the other players are aligned? I get the sense
that there are strong alliances forming to the north and the west.
Thanks for anything you can shed light on.
--- Tzarface
Message from Russia to Italy
So what's your take on the G to RAI press? I suspect it's a tactic to
hamstring IR cooperation.
How do you think we should handle it? My take is that assuming Turkey is on
board with RTI v A, there's really not much that Germany can do if we
attack Austria -- well, there's not much he can do to you -- he might be
able to do something to me, but hopefully EF will keep him busy.
The real question is do we agree to this plan and undermine it later, or do
we debate it down to the point that it's next to useless. I lean towards
the latter, even though I realize the former has its merits.
--- Eric
Message from Russia to England
>According to Andy our Germany is hell on wheels, so watch your back.
I'm getting that impression without needing a reputation to confirm it!
Very interesting press coming from him. Based on what I've heard from him
so far, I do request that you not trust anything he says about me without
checking in with me for confirmation. I don't mean "are you going to stab
me" stuff (you wouldn't believe my answer whatever I said if you are
worried about one). I mean, if he tells you I'm mad at someone, or want to
see someone hurt, etc. please check in with me before taking action based
on it. I just get the distinct impression that he may be pretty loose with
his portrayal of other players' mindsets and situations.
Again, I may be being paranoid, but perhaps better to be safe and mention
the concern. What are you hearing from GF?
>when you happen to have your fleet in Sweden
>F'01, we may be able to find some good things to do with it in '02, looking
>forward.
That is the point of putting it there, though obviously Germany had some
different suggestions about how it could be effective. But since Germany
(1) is clearly an "operator" and (2) can hit both Scandinavia and my home
centers, I see lots of value in working with you to knock him out quickly.
Basically, I'm fine with playing things by ear, but I'm also up for talking
about how we might move forward from that position in F'02. I'd want to
move towards a position that is defensible in the north without being
threatening to you. That probably means another northern fleet to secure
Den/Bal, but to be honest I don't remember the minimum unit counts that the
other Eric kept talking about in C1. I'll look it up and get more specific
as we go forward.
Just trying to get a sense of what kinds of things would constitute "good
things" to do. I personally find it's a good idea to talk stuff out
hypothetically before the fact, so that we can more easily come up with
mutually agreeable plans when our units get closer together.
Sound good? Anything else we need to talk about?
--- Tzarface
Message from Russia to Russia
>Message from Germany to Russia, Austria and Italy in 'c2':
[...]
>So far GIA have been trying to coordinate plans. So has
>Austria and Russia and Germany and Russia. With Russia on board then we can
>at least build on a 4 some to start off with.
Interesting.
Does it strike any of you that telling me about pre-existing GIA
conversations is a risky thing to do? Or broadcasting details of my GR
communications with IA without checking with me first?
It's a very interesting strategy. I can see lots of benefits, especially in
trying to keep Austria strong and an RI from forming. But if he didn't
check with IA first either, it could do just as much damage as good. This
isn't a strategy I've seen before, so I'm not sure how to respond.
--- Eric
Message from Russia to Austria
>How are things going in the north?
Things in the north are going fine, but in my experience things are always
fine before moves are made.
What do you think of Germany's suggestion? In principle I'm very happy to
promise all three of you (GIA) that I will not go to Gal, Pru or Sil if
that's what our final agreements are (you and I may still decide to bounce
in Gal). But I don't know Germany or Italy so well to know if it makes
sense to tie all of our actions together. Do you think we need a four way
agreement to be able to cooperate?
Just trying to figure out whether this is something that is Germany's idea,
or something that GIA all support.
Thanks,
--- Tzarface
Message from Italy to Russia
> So what's your take on the G to RAI press? I suspect it's a tactic to
> hamstring IR cooperation.
Or just keep you onside for a year. Which is what he alludes to in his
next press to just Austria and I.
> How do you think we should handle it? My take is that assuming Turkey is on
> board with RTI v A, there's really not much that Germany can do if we
> attack Austria -- well, there's not much he can do to you -- he might be
> able to do something to me, but hopefully EF will keep him busy.
No. But Austria is so paranoid of me, I have to appear nuetral until the
fall season. He is hedgehogging on me. So I have to stay at home.
> The real question is do we agree to this plan and undermine it later, or do
> we debate it down to the point that it's next to useless. I lean towards
> the latter, even though I realize the former has its merits.
I dont think we do either implicitely, we agree to it tacitly in the open
and then we do whatever the hell we want. And you explain it away any way
you want to....ie....it was too good to be true....or whatever.
Andy
Message from Austria to Russia
> Things in the north are going fine, but in my experience things are always
> fine before moves are made.
Same feeling in regard of Italy. Also, while I much prefer to
see you go for Sev-Bla & Mos-Sev if you can get away
with it, I'm fine with seeing you take care of your northern
interest with Mos-Sev; but in the long run, I do expect you
to actively cooperate with me in the south and not simply
use me to contain Turkey ;-) Not that I believe this would
actually happen, but better safe then sorry.
> What do you think of Germany's suggestion? In principle I'm very happy to
> promise all three of you (GIA) that I will not go to Gal, Pru or Sil if
> that's what our final agreements are (you and I may still decide to bounce
> in Gal). But I don't know Germany or Italy so well to know if it makes
> sense to tie all of our actions together. Do you think we need a four way
> agreement to be able to cooperate?
No I don't; but since it's there I will take it.
> Just trying to figure out whether this is something that is Germany's idea,
> or something that GIA all support.
It's Germany's idea and I will go along with it. If GIA allow
me to work with you without having to worry about my
back, I'm not about to complain; but I'm not about to limit
RA's collaboration to what GIAR think is appropriate.
Since we are talking of Germany, what do you think of
France and England? Tony is obviously an expert diplomat
and I was wondering about Ben and Erik. Will they be up
to the task or should I be warry of having to deal with a
strong Germany at my back soon?
Philippe
Message from Germany to Russia
Didnt you receive my very very long press? I have a few details I wish to
pass on but I am still awaiting a reply from you.
Message from England to all
Gentlemen -
I have out of town company this weekend & will not likely be available
until about 36 hour from now. Which is roughly a day and a half, in Tony's
time.
Thank you for your patience.
Ben
Message from Turkey to Russia
Tsar,
I'm getting various signals from the west. Austria seems to have some
sort of alliance under his belt, as he's confident of survival, but I
couldn't say what it is (Leptano?) France is casting gloom and doom
everywhere, but EFG seems up in the air. Germany actually said that he
wants RT! Italy has been friendly, but I know he's a devious sort as well.
Right now, I'm hoping the openings reveal more than talk alone, but that
remains to be seen. I'm certainly happy to work with you. Let's stick to
our current plan, as I've been downplaying RT to everyone, and see where
it takes us.
jason
Message from England to Russia
Mr. Face -
Grabbed a few seconds to send out a quick note:
> >According to Andy our Germany is hell on wheels, so watch your back.
>
> I'm getting that impression without needing a reputation to confirm it!
>
> Very interesting press coming from him. Based on what I've heard from him
> so far, I do request that you not trust anything he says about me without
> checking in with me for confirmation. I don't mean "are you going to stab
> me" stuff (you wouldn't believe my answer whatever I said if you are
> worried about one). I mean, if he tells you I'm mad at someone, or want to
> see someone hurt, etc. please check in with me before taking action based
> on it. I just get the distinct impression that he may be pretty loose with
> his portrayal of other players' mindsets and situations.
Of course the same is true for me. I have already heard X from him and Y
from another player & I suspect the truth to be Y.
> Again, I may be being paranoid, but perhaps better to be safe and mention
> the concern. What are you hearing from GF?
So far everyone is getting along ok, as far as I can tell, here in the
west. No flashpoint, but no firm resolution of the ususal sore spots,
either.
> >when you happen to have your fleet in Sweden
> >F'01, we may be able to find some good things to do with it in '02,
looking
> >forward.
>
> That is the point of putting it there, though obviously Germany had some
> different suggestions about how it could be effective. But since Germany
> (1) is clearly an "operator" and (2) can hit both Scandinavia and my home
> centers, I see lots of value in working with you to knock him out quickly.
Good. Keep that thought. We'll put it to use, when the time is right.
> Basically, I'm fine with playing things by ear, but I'm also up for
talking
> about how we might move forward from that position in F'02. I'd want to
> move towards a position that is defensible in the north without being
> threatening to you. That probably means another northern fleet to secure
> Den/Bal, but to be honest I don't remember the minimum unit counts that
the
> other Eric kept talking about in C1. I'll look it up and get more specific
> as we go forward.
I am all in favor of reasonable garrisons to protect our peaceful border.
But the large deployment necessary to have the "minimum units" for the
protection of Northern Russia may not be an efficient use of your units.
Do the research, I encourage you, but you are talking about more units then
dots. You would find you had no units to maintain the hotter fronts in
your south. We will cross this bridge when we come to it, though.
> Just trying to get a sense of what kinds of things would constitute "good
> things" to do. I personally find it's a good idea to talk stuff out
> hypothetically before the fact, so that we can more easily come up with
> mutually agreeable plans when our units get closer together.
Absolutely.
> Sound good? Anything else we need to talk about?
In general I have had success with Russia by going into Germany or the
Turkish/Balkan area. I have not had success - though I've tried it -
becoming a naval power in the Atlantic. Basically beyond Norway there's
not much for you, just as beyond STP there's not much for me. It is
another reason for us to be allied, I think.
Anyway it is always excellent to hear from you.
Ben
Message from England to Russia
Mr. Face -
Had a laugh at myself when I reread this:
> > Just trying to get a sense of what kinds of things would constitute
"good
> > things" to do. I personally find it's a good idea to talk stuff out
> > hypothetically before the fact, so that we can more easily come up with
> > mutually agreeable plans when our units get closer together.
> Absolutely.
:-) Didn't mean to dodge your question. I'm alittle reluctant to start
assigning some dots to you, some to me, etc., as we do not know what
outside forces will be exerted against us or our mutual target(s). But it
would be something roughly along the famous stalemate line, I think.
Ben
Message from Italy to Russia
Eric,
I have been thinking about what you said, in reference to either
1. Agreeing to the alliance of GRIA and just attacking Austria out of the
box.
2. Playing along, killing the Turk and then Killing the Austrian.
And your preference to the first option. It is a non-starter for me,
unless we can get complete cooperation from the Turk.
For me to attack Austria, I basically have to go to Tyrolia, which is
spelled out as declaration of war on Germany and you, not that it would
hold much weight with you. Unless we can get the Turk to support APU - GRE
from BUL in F01' its a non-starter.
How do you suggest we get around the Austrian paranoia, The Turk says he
is on board to take down Austria, but who knows what that means, and I
would rather see him dead first in many ways. But if we need to take down
the Austrian first...Im all ears....
talk to me.
Andy
Message from England to all
Greetings one and all. Company's gone & the house is quiet, but tomorrow
will probably be pretty busy, so forgive me if response time lags.
Ben
Message from Russia to Germany
>Didnt you receive my very very long press? I have a few details I wish to
>pass on but I am still awaiting a reply from you.
Sorry, I have three messages from you. I started a response at work Friday,
but apparently I never finished and sent it. It was a very busy day at
work, and I was sending out messages for two games between meetings. I
thought I had sent something to you, but apparently didn't really.
Yesterday (and most of today) I was out of town and out of Internet reach.
So I have indeed been ignoring you, but not intentionally. As I said, I
thought I had sent press to you -- must have been that I sent press to
Germany in a different game. (Hopefully I didn't talk about our plans with
him though!)
I will admit that I was a little annoyed when you sent the RIA combined
press, because I am still talking with Austria about whether we want a DMZ
in Gal or a bounce. I didn't appreciate having my ability to negotiate such
an arrangement superceded by your broadcast. That said, when I went back
over my last press to you, I can see why you could have misinterpreted my
message that said "I might agree to the DMZ" to mean that I wanted you to
press the issue.
>We did speak of Sweden. I would have no reason to prevent your build unless
>you were hostile towards me in the spring. Something I know wont happen. So
>yes, sweden is yours. I recall stating that I even want Sweden to carry on
>to Norway. Lets take it one step at the time.
I'm very happy to cooperate with Sweden. As I said earlier, though, I'm
more likely to build north than to move north. So far, I agree that England
is playing wait and see. France and I are talking some, but nothing very
specific. What I've heard indicates that IA don't like each other. I assume
your broadcast was intended to help contain that situation. While in
concept I don't mind the idea of your four-way GRAI arrangement to allow us
to get the step on Turkey, I will admit that I'm concerned about putting
myself into a position where other people get to control who I get to work
with. Meaning, that if Austria attacks Italy I'd be duty-bound to attack
him, and vice-versa. That might be a problem if I'm in the middle of
something with Turkey.
>Lets keep talking. Nothing new yet from England or France or Turkey, or
>Italy or Austria.
Sounds good. Again, my apologies for the long silence. I thought I had been
sharing information, but my message to you got lost.
I'll get back to you on what develops between Austria and me. As I said, so
far we've agreed that we'll probably DMZ Gal, but we were still debating
bouncing there instead. If we bounce because we mutually agree to, I don't
want that to cause you to keep Sweden out of my hands!
--- Tzarface
Message from Russia to France
Erik,
>Of course, you may be interested in an anti-German or anti-English
>opening off the bat, and that could change my plans completely. Please let
>me know, if possible, if you're headed in that direction.
Okay, at this point I'm still looking at an innocuous opening, but I would
probably be happier with an anti-G move from you if I get a vote. I don't
really care from a board setup point of view, but I think Germany is much
more dangerous of a player and has more of an alliance structure setup with
IA, so would be more difficult to take out later.
But since I'm not planning to be obvious about helping you right away
(War-Sil is a pretty insane opening move in my mind!) that's not by any
means an ultimatum.
--- Tzarface
Message from Russia to Italy
Andy,
Sorry, out of town for a day, and expected a chance to send email before I
left that didn't come. (Went to see a James Taylor concert among other
things). Today I had to wait until I could get over the Raiders' and
Giants' dismal performances before I had a positive enough attitude to send
press. :(
So far Turkey is taking a "wait and see" kind of approach with me, though
he seems willing to consider cooperation. I get the same sense you do, it's
not clear what his flexibility means. I have no idea whether or not Turkey
will want to support you to Gre, me to Rum, or work with Austria to keep
either from happening. For now we'll bounce in Bla and then I'll see if I
get Rum!
I completely get that you can't attack Austria if he's hedgehogging. I'm
still negotiating with him about whether we (A/R) should bounce instead of
DMZ. (I'm concerned that his hedgehog will include violating the Gal DMZ if
I leave it alone). If we bounce, it could work well to get him bouncing all
around in spring, while you hit Gre in Fall. That would allow me to "work
with" A/G according to the German agreement then really put a hit on
Austria. That's what I meant about there being an upside to you attacking
Austria if A/G think it means I'll cooperate with them.
The huge downside from your point of view is of course that it gives me all
the initiative. I could leave you hanging by not attacking, or I could take
a majority of the spoils if you're being attacked and I get the open front.
So I'm not really expecting it to happen in '01. But in Fall (Gre) Or next
season it could happen. However, I trust that you see that the *only*
reason I have to (say that I) agree to the German proposal is to avoid
creating an angry GA v R alliance. I have absolutely zero interest in an
agreement that seeks to build a strong GA, and even less to build a strong
GAI block, as either would basically guarantee someone comes to attack me.
This is all a really long way of saying that I'm looking for how to hit A,
whether now or later, given Germany's strong commitment to him. I've got
more flexibility to attack Austria than you, but I also have both of them
on my borders. So it's hard to assess who takes the greater risk in taking
a clear move against him.m
Any thoughts on EF vs. G? Germany's pushing the alliance structure in the
north the same way he is in the south. If EF can be created and hold
together, that will give me the flexibility to do whatever we need down here.
--- Eric
Message from Russia to Turkey
Sultan Jason,
>Germany actually said that he wants RT!
He does? It would be good if he told me that! That's (RT) my inclination
too, but he's been pressing me pretty hard NOT to attack Austria.
--- Tzarface
Message from Russia to England
>I am all in favor of reasonable garrisons to protect our peaceful border.
>But the large deployment necessary to have the "minimum units" for the
>protection of Northern Russia may not be an efficient use of your units.
>Do the research, I encourage you, but you are talking about more units then
>dots. You would find you had no units to maintain the hotter fronts in
>your south. We will cross this bridge when we come to it, though.
Right. And I don't mean a huge deployment. I just wanted to point out that
to truly take out Germany, we'll need some fleets in the Bal/GoB area. I
would prefer them to be mine (as opposed to having you sail fleets there)
so would expect that I would build northern fleets as necessary to do so.
>I'm alittle reluctant to start
>assigning some dots to you, some to me, etc., as we do not know what
>outside forces will be exerted against us or our mutual target(s).
Agreed. The purpose of the comments wasn't to chisel in stone who gets what
dots, but to ferret out what might be big issues in terms of cooperation. I
don't want it to be a problem when I do come tell you I want to build a
fleet that you thought you'd have all the northern fleets. Exactly when a
fleet gets raised and where its force is aimed is something that will be
dictated by the situation.
I'm getting a lot of pressure to make a northern opening. I'm assuming
that's something you would prefer not to see. The only upside it has is
that it would certainly surprise Germany if I moved to Bal and advanced the
army to Swe! Let me know if you want to consider this maneuver. I think it
would be interesting, though risky for both of us -- it would make you
nervous about Nwy, and it would make me nervous about Germany (I'm not sure
I can trust him not to jump on me if I go north as he suggests).
--- Tzarface
Message from Russia to Austria
>Also, while I much prefer to
>see you go for Sev-Bla & Mos-Sev if you can get away
>with it
Sev-Bla for sure. But it's virtually guaranteed to bounce, so I haven't
decided about Mos yet.
>in the long run, I do expect you
>to actively cooperate with me in the south and not simply
>use me to contain Turkey ;-) Not that I believe this would
>actually happen, but better safe then sorry.
No worries there, I'm much more worried about having you around to contain
Andy. :)
Seriously, I can understand that this could be a worry of yours. I'm much
more interested in seeing us both get established in the south and moving
*away* from each other than sitting around embroiled in the south while
Andy and Tony stabilize the west and come after us.
>>Do you think we need a four way agreement to be able to cooperate?
>
>No I don't; but since it's there I will take it.
>[...]
>It's Germany's idea and I will go along with it. If GIA allow
>me to work with you without having to worry about my
>back, I'm not about to complain; but I'm not about to limit
>RA's collaboration to what GIAR think is appropriate.
Gotcha. The thing that was confusing to me is that both you and I agreed in
our last exchange that we would revisit later whether we both wanted a DMZ
or a bounce. Having the decision "made" by a third party was surprising to
me, and I wondered if it was a sign that you have some serious reservation
about me that made you go to him to negotiate instead of coming to me.
To be clear, I don't have a problem with the GRIA "pact", I was just
worried that it indicated that you were uncomfortable negotiating with me.
Shall I take this as a sign that you really want the DMZ and not the bounce?
>Since we are talking of Germany, what do you think of
>France and England? Tony is obviously an expert diplomat
>and I was wondering about Ben and Erik. Will they be up
>to the task or should I be warry of having to deal with a
>strong Germany at my back soon?
I can't tell. I think both England and France are being flexible. My
concern is that, yes, Germany may be able to take advantage of their casual
attitudes. Though frankly I'm more worried about having a strong Germany at
*my* back than I am about having him at *your* back. For you, I'd be more
worried about Andy, but I think Andy and Tony have the ability to
coordinate such things, and as such would see either of them doing well as
a concern for both of us.
--- Tzarface
Message from Turkey to Russia
Well, it's Germany's job to tell you not to attack Austria. As Austria
goes, so goes Germany.
jason
Message from England to Russia
Mr. Face -
> Right. And I don't mean a huge deployment. I just wanted to point out that
> to truly take out Germany, we'll need some fleets in the Bal/GoB area. I
> would prefer them to be mine (as opposed to having you sail fleets there)
> so would expect that I would build northern fleets as necessary to do so.
Things to discuss as we go - I will not argue about bridges we may never
reach. For heaven's sake, if you are blitzed by AT, I imagine it will be
quite some time before you & I need to discuss your desire to construct a
unt in STP, & if I am blitzed by FG, then I imagine a F STP/sc would not be
such an unwelcome sight. Really I hope enough said on this subject, for
now.
> >I'm alittle reluctant to start
> >assigning some dots to you, some to me, etc., as we do not know what
> >outside forces will be exerted against us or our mutual target(s).
>
> Agreed. The purpose of the comments wasn't to chisel in stone who gets
what
> dots, but to ferret out what might be big issues in terms of cooperation.
I
> don't want it to be a problem when I do come tell you I want to build a
> fleet that you thought you'd have all the northern fleets. Exactly when a
> fleet gets raised and where its force is aimed is something that will be
> dictated by the situation.
Yes.
> I'm getting a lot of pressure to make a northern opening. I'm assuming
> that's something you would prefer not to see. The only upside it has is
> that it would certainly surprise Germany if I moved to Bal and advanced
the
> army to Swe! Let me know if you want to consider this maneuver. I think it
> would be interesting, though risky for both of us -- it would make you
> nervous about Nwy, and it would make me nervous about Germany (I'm not
sure
> I can trust him not to jump on me if I go north as he suggests).
From whom are you getting pressure? The convoy to SWE is a nice maneuver
though I had thought it was principally anti-English, rather than anything
else, & if you wanted to harass Germany with a F BOT, A LVN, it might make
more sense to order to SWE & PRU. Whether you go to LVN is a separate
question, as you no doubt recall in C1 Eric Hunter opened WAR - LVN. As I
recall his reasoning was, he didn't know who he could trust & didn't want
to offend anyone. So go ahead, if you have for instance dmz'ed GAL, BOH,
etc., go to LVN. Going to STP is of course good only for annoying the
English, and will not help you should WAR be threatened.
Which is not out of the realm of possibilities, rather I expect you to be
attacked in the south & will be surprised if you are not. After all
Austria's one solo, in his six games, came as an Austria starting off by
attacking Russia. Bobbie on USGG. Still if you want to give Austria the
benefit of the doubt, go to LVN, so you can take RUM from UKR and SEV and
cover WAR from LVN.
Ben
p.s. For your edification I attach a press you sent me a few days ago.
Make of it what you will:
> Well Germany and Austria got back to me, and I must admit that the timing
> and content of their messages makes me suspicious. I'll let you imagine
the
> tactical details of why I say this, but overall their combined proposed
> moves would leave me in a really bad position should they cooperate to
take
> advantage of it.
>
> Or maybe I'm just being paranoid.
>
> More later.
Message from Austria to Russia
> Gotcha. The thing that was confusing to me is that both you and I agreed in
> our last exchange that we would revisit later whether we both wanted a DMZ
> or a bounce. Having the decision "made" by a third party was surprising to
> me, and I wondered if it was a sign that you have some serious reservation
> about me that made you go to him to negotiate instead of coming to me.
>
> To be clear, I don't have a problem with the GRIA "pact", I was just
> worried that it indicated that you were uncomfortable negotiating with me.
>
> Shall I take this as a sign that you really want the DMZ and not the bounce?
I should probably have been more clear. I'm still waiting for you
to get back to me about Galicia. I really don't see a problem
with an organize bounce over a dmz and I don't think Germany's
statement was against it either.
So please don't let someone else interfere with our relationship,
Philippe
Message from France to Russia
>
> Okay, at this point I'm still looking at an innocuous
> opening, but I would probably be happier with an anti-G move
> from you if I get a vote. I don't really care from a board
> setup point of view, but I think Germany is much more
> dangerous of a player and has more of an alliance structure
> setup with IA, so would be more difficult to take out later.
As it stands, I'm leaning toward cementing an immediate EF, especially
if GAI is in place. Do you know the extent of their relationship? Is the
central alliance definite at this point? AI are being very cagey, so I
certainly wouldn't find that hard to believe.
I will do what I can to figure out Germany's opening. If he's cozy with
AI and thinks that he doesn't have any trouble coming from me (he's
suggested working against England, of course, but is probably just happy
leaving me to swing in the breeze), you could be in trouble. I'll keep
an eye out for a sign of attack against you.
Do you have any idea what's happening between AIT?
Erik
Message from Russia to England
Germany was pushing for a northern opening. You needn't worry about an army
in StP in Fall, that just won't be happening. At the same time, I won't
open to Pru in Spring, but I don't expect that's what you meant.
Sorry, the last message was a bit rambly. I need to learn never to write
right after a bad football game by the Raiders. :) My thinking is never
straight under those circumstances.
--- Tzarface
Message from Russia to Austria
>I should probably have been more clear. I'm still waiting for you
>to get back to me about Galicia. I really don't see a problem
>with an organize bounce over a dmz and I don't think Germany's
>statement was against it either.
Gotcha. I'm fine with a DMZ there. And since it does allow us to establish
some trust that's a bonus as well.
>So please don't let someone else interfere with our relationship,
Thanks, I appreciate the clarification(s).
--- Eric
Message from Russia to France
Erik,
>if GAI is in place. Do you know the extent of their relationship? Is the
>central alliance definite at this point? AI are being very cagey, so I
>certainly wouldn't find that hard to believe.
I'm convinced that there has been shared GAI press. But obviously if
there's a central alliance, I wouldn't know about it!
>I will do what I can to figure out Germany's opening. If he's cozy with
>AI and thinks that he doesn't have any trouble coming from me (he's
>suggested working against England, of course, but is probably just happy
>leaving me to swing in the breeze), you could be in trouble. I'll keep
>an eye out for a sign of attack against you.
This is my biggest concern at the moment. It's the kind of gamble I've had
particularly bad luck with recently (betting when someone is coming after
me vs. when they are going to work with me). So I have a bad feeling I'm
going to see my first Mun-Sil, Ber-Pru, Vie-Gal, Smy-Arm opening.
>Do you have any idea what's happening between AIT?
Turkey tells me he's taking a wait-and-see approach, which basically means
nothing to me except that he's not ready to agree to an alliance with me.
I know that's not really much information, but for now that's the best I've
got.
--- Tzarface
Message from Germany to Russia
No you two bouncing wouldnt be a problem. They do seem to be having their difficulties as Austria insists on opening tri - ven. But at least he is open about it.
Message from Italy to Russia
> Sorry, out of town for a day, and expected a chance to send email before I
> left that didn't come. (Went to see a James Taylor concert among other
> things). Today I had to wait until I could get over the Raiders' and
> Giants' dismal performances before I had a positive enough attitude to send
> press. :(
Well....James Taylor is capable of rattling anyone...:-)
> So far Turkey is taking a "wait and see" kind of approach with me, though
> he seems willing to consider cooperation. I get the same sense you do, it's
> not clear what his flexibility means. I have no idea whether or not Turkey
> will want to support you to Gre, me to Rum, or work with Austria to keep
> either from happening. For now we'll bounce in Bla and then I'll see if I
> get Rum!
Turkey seems gung-ho as hell to attack Austria, but that could just be a
ruse.
> I completely get that you can't attack Austria if he's hedgehogging. I'm
> still negotiating with him about whether we (A/R) should bounce instead of
> DMZ. (I'm concerned that his hedgehog will include violating the Gal DMZ if
> I leave it alone). If we bounce, it could work well to get him bouncing all
> around in spring, while you hit Gre in Fall. That would allow me to "work
> with" A/G according to the German agreement then really put a hit on
> Austria. That's what I meant about there being an upside to you attacking
> Austria if A/G think it means I'll cooperate with them.
Im not hitting Greece unless I know I can take it.
> The huge downside from your point of view is of course that it gives me all
> the initiative. I could leave you hanging by not attacking, or I could take
> a majority of the spoils if you're being attacked and I get the open front.
> So I'm not really expecting it to happen in '01. But in Fall (Gre) Or next
> season it could happen. However, I trust that you see that the *only*
> reason I have to (say that I) agree to the German proposal is to avoid
> creating an angry GA v R alliance. I have absolutely zero interest in an
> agreement that seeks to build a strong GA, and even less to build a strong
> GAI block, as either would basically guarantee someone comes to attack me.
Either do I. Especially if the Austrian is going to continue to jump every
time I say Boo.
> This is all a really long way of saying that I'm looking for how to hit A,
> whether now or later, given Germany's strong commitment to him. I've got
> more flexibility to attack Austria than you, but I also have both of them
> on my borders. So it's hard to assess who takes the greater risk in taking
> a clear move against him.m
Correct.
> Any thoughts on EF vs. G? Germany's pushing the alliance structure in the
> north the same way he is in the south. If EF can be created and hold
> together, that will give me the flexibility to do whatever we need down here.
I have been pushing it since the beginningof the game.....I think they are
together.
Andy
Its a flaming baton
Thats ready to twirl
Its George Bush on acid
Singing the Duke of Earl
Gonna be a new world
-Mojo Nixon
Message from England to Russia
Mr. Face -
> Germany was pushing for a northern opening. You needn't worry about an
army
> in StP in Fall, that just won't be happening. At the same time, I won't
> open to Pru in Spring, but I don't expect that's what you meant.
No, I meant LVN. I imagine Germany was hoping for the error MOS - STP,
which I am glad to hear is off the table.
> Sorry, the last message was a bit rambly. I need to learn never to write
> right after a bad football game by the Raiders. :) My thinking is never
> straight under those circumstances.
What's wrong with blowing a 15 point halftime lead? And losing? Good lord
you must have had a rough few weeks. ;-)
Ben
Message from Russia to England
> > I need to learn never to write
> > right after a bad football game by the Raiders. :) My thinking is never
> > straight under those circumstances.
>
>What's wrong with blowing a 15 point halftime lead? And losing? Good lord
>you must have had a rough few weeks. ;-)
Well I was at the game last week (vs. San Diego) which was annoying
but ended well, so I thought things were going to get better. Of
course, I'm also a Giants (baseball) fan, so yes, it has been just a
lovely time in sports-land here!
--- Tzarface
Message from France to Russia
Tzarface:
>
> I'm convinced that there has been shared GAI press. But obviously if
> there's a central alliance, I wouldn't know about it!
Good point.
> So I have a bad feeling I'm
> going to see my first Mun-Sil, Ber-Pru, Vie-Gal, Smy-Arm opening.
I wish I could say otherwise, but I have to tell you that signs are
pointing to a German attack against you early. Even if that's not correct
and you're not looking to risk get into a fight with him in the first
turn, I'd keep an army around your front with him just in case.
As I said, I'm leaning toward an EF attack against Germany, simply because
the threat of a central alliance and the supposed quality of Tony's play
suggests that course of action. I hope to have everything cemented by the
end of S01; once the alliance is set in place over here, I'll go over the
details with you and we can decide the best way to work against EG down
the road. If Germany opens strong against you, England and I can probably
move in quickly on him from Holland / Denmark / Munich.
While you'll need to keep Warsaw intact, I'm hoping England's eventual
attack on Germany will give you a chance to move a little bit of force up
north to help push England back and give you a shot at Scandanavia. Too
early for those specifics, I suppose, but I can't help thinking ahead.
>
> >Do you have any idea what's happening between AIT?
>
> Turkey tells me he's taking a wait-and-see approach, which basically
> means
> nothing to me except that he's not ready to agree to an alliance with
> me.
>
> I know that's not really much information, but for now that's the best
> I've
> got.
Pretty much jives with what he's told me, which is "hey, thanks for
writing, but let's see what happens in '01." Not the best approach for a
Turkish player, if you ask me ... Are you two bouncing in Bla?
So what's the story with Tzarface? Role-playing that you decided to
abandon, or just your broadcast persona?
Erik
Message from England to Russia
Eric -
> Well I was at the game last week (vs. San Diego) which was annoying
> but ended well, so I thought things were going to get better. Of
> course, I'm also a Giants (baseball) fan, so yes, it has been just a
> lovely time in sports-land here!
A frustrating couple of years, even. But I don't understand - you are a
fan of the Oakland Raiders but not Oakland A's, and the San Francisco
Giants but not the San Francisco 49'ers?
I am closely familiar with some Raider frustration in recent years,
incidentally. I am from Baltimore. Glad to see Rich Gannon's shoulder's
recovered. . .
[ducks]
Ben
Message from Russia to France
>I wish I could say otherwise, but I have to tell you that signs are
>pointing to a German attack against you early. Even if that's not correct
>and you're not looking to risk get into a fight with him in the first
>turn, I'd keep an army around your front with him just in case.
Well, I just wrote a long comment to the list (i.e., press to self)
that talked about what I see as the pros and cons of risking an early
GAT vs. R attack. Results in this game will probably affect the way I
approach games in the future!
>While you'll need to keep Warsaw intact, I'm hoping England's eventual
>attack on Germany will give you a chance to move a little bit of force up
>north to help push England back and give you a shot at Scandanavia. Too
>early for those specifics, I suppose, but I can't help thinking ahead.
I don't mind this kind of hypothetical discussion at all, though I
agree that specifics are fluid at this point.
>Pretty much jives with what he's told me, which is "hey, thanks for
>writing, but let's see what happens in '01." Not the best approach for a
>Turkish player, if you ask me ... Are you two bouncing in Bla?
If not, I'll be very surprised. :)
>So what's the story with Tzarface? Role-playing that you decided to
>abandon, or just your broadcast persona?
I wanted to respond to the grey broadcast, and I figured role-playing
the angry response was more effective than trying to be defensive or
leaving it unanswered. So it's really just the broadcast persona.
I leave my messages signed as "Tzarface" because I like to have a
different name in different games. It just helps me to remember the
game and game history when I'm composing a message. Also, I usually
edit an old message rather than composing from scratch to avoid
retyping the whole "signon...." stuff, so it keeps me from grabbing
the wrong template and sending press to someone in a different game.
--- Eric/Tzarface
Message from Austria to Russia
> Gotcha. I'm fine with a DMZ there. And since it does allow us to establish
> some trust that's a bonus as well.
Then it's settle, we leave Galicia alone and rely on the dmz.
Philippe
Message from Russia to Russia
Greetings commentators,
In an attempt to actually follow the guidelines of the game, here's a
status report with Russian blinders on:
Generally:
I tend to play a game where I react to the desires of the other
players, rather than trying to pressure their decisions -- especially
early in the game. I imagine you can already see that coming through
in my early press, where I asked each of AT whether they wanted a
bounce or a DMZ in Gal/Bla, but also in the way I reacted to
Germany's RAI press. What I'm finding over time is that this strategy
works well as long as you don't become the first target on the board.
In my last two games, I've been the first target, and had three way
alliances that eliminated me very early on.
I also tend to be honest about my early moves. I really don't want
anyone surprised by my moves prior to S02 at the earliest. As with
the being reactionary, it's worked well when I'm not the first target.
Players:
Austria: My interactions with Austria have probably been my worst so
far. In particular, my assumption that Germany's press to IAR was an
indication of strong GA coordination caused me to focus too much on
Germany's message and too little on Austria's, even if I was correct
in my assessment. Basically, I have been dealing with him through
middle-men instead of directly, and that's a big mistake.
England: We seem to be hitting things off well, though clearly my
pressing to discuss futures bothered him, and should have been a sign
not to mention anything about northern openings (except that they
won't be happening). A case of "being too open" -- a side-effect
issue of the being too honest early -- that is also causing me
problems in other games.
France: Cooperation looks to be good, but of course there's no real
risk to either of us directly from the other, so it makes sense that
we help each other out.
Germany: Mostly discussed above. It took me a long time to put
together a message that was not antagonistic in response to the GIA
message. No doubt that's why I overlooked sending him a response
earlier. That was *not* intentional, but since he no doubt knows that
other people got press at the same time, it was a mistake.
Italy: It hurts my brain to write such short messages to him. :) I'm
a windbag, but watching C1 it seems that rambling is a bad idea with
him. I probably shouldn't do it with anyone, actually! No doubt he's
going to be good practice for me, even if he doesn't care that I try
to keep messages to him short.
Turkey: Much the same comments as with England in terms of
cooperation but I have less confidence that he's going to want to
work with me.
Situation:
I won't open north. I will open to Ukr and Bla, which is basically a
no-brainer. So my only real decision is what to do with whichever
unit does not take Ukr. Holding in War gives me security in case of a
German attack, but antagonizes both G and A. Holding in Mos or moving
Mos-Sev could leave me more open to an attack and the latter could be
seen as antagonistic by Turkey (even though he knows I know it will
fail). But the big question is whether or not DMZing Gal is a
mistake. I am seriously concerned about GA, AT or GAT cooperation,
which could be really ugly for me if Austria ends up in Gal and
Turkey in Arm. If I were to negotiate for what I actually want, I'd
take the bounce in Gal. If Phillipe violates the DMZ, I'll have to
seriously reconsider my "whatever you want" approach to the early
game.
So for now I'm going to trust that Andy really does have Phillipe
nervous enough to stay focused west, and that EF will keep Germany
occupied. It's not clearly in Andy's interest to see me fall quickly,
so hopefully that's not a ruse they worked out to hide a central
alliance. If Phillipe is distracted west, then hopefully at worst
he'll view me as someone to deal with later, and at best a better
ally than Turkey. I'm also hoping that EF vs. G is actually
happening, which should make Germany less of a problem. If all of
those hopes come through, I could be in a good position. Pessimist
that I am, I'm expecting Vie-Gal, Smy-Arm, Lvp-Edi-Nwy, and maybe
Mun-Pru, Ber-Sil.
--- Eric
Message from Russia to England
>But I don't understand - you are a fan of the Oakland Raiders but
>not Oakland A's, and the San Francisco Giants but not the San
>Francisco 49'ers?
It's just a symptom of my larger emotional problems. :)
Short life story version relevant to this point: I was an army brat
in my wee years, family moved to SF, and I watched my first football
game. It was the Raiders vs. the Steelers. Kid-logic being what it
is, I decided I liked the Raiders better because they had the cooler
logo. I only later found that they were a local team. The year that
happened makes me think that I must have been watching the game that
ended with the Immaculate Reception, but I really don't remember the
details that well.
I was much older when I first got interested in baseball, and by then
we were established in SF. So I went with the Giants. I don't dislike
the A's, but I'm a fair weather fan. I was a Niner's fan when they
were a bad team, and was a big fan when they got Montana. Ironically
as they got better (through the late 80's-early 90's) I got less and
less supportive of them. Probably envious, if you recall the
performance of the Raiders over that same time frame.
>I am closely familiar with some Raider frustration in recent
>years,incidentally. I am from Baltimore. Glad to see Rich Gannon's
>shoulder's recovered. . .
More galling is that it was Shannon Sharpe who scored the crucial TD!
I thought we were finally through with him when he left Denver. But
don't worry, my frustration with Baltimore is way low on the list.
I'm actually more upset about the "fumble that wasn't" from '77 when
Denver beat the Raiders in the playoffs.
At least in Baltimore we lost because we were outplayed. Now, mention
"tuck", and we've got a whole other problem! :)
--- Tzarface
Message from France to Russia
Eric:
Andy's been sending a lot of dire warnings to England and I about Tony
-- lots of "you've got to work together, he'll chop you to pieces, run
for the hills," etc. etc. Given Andy's penchant for sending press that
only relates to his immediate future (at least, as far as I've noticed),
I'm trying to sort out the angle on this one.
My suspicion is that Germany's managed to exert a lot of influence over
the paranoid Austrian and dash a lot of Italian plans, and a frustrated
Andy is taking his revenge. Am I missing something about Tony? He hasn't
particularly impressed me so far, but you also noted that you'd like to
see him go down sooner rather than later.
Erik
Message from Russia to France
>My suspicion is that Germany's managed to exert a lot of influence over
>the paranoid Austrian and dash a lot of Italian plans, and a frustrated
>Andy is taking his revenge. Am I missing something about Tony? He hasn't
>particularly impressed me so far, but you also noted that you'd like to
>see him go down sooner rather than later.
That's exactly what I was getting at when I said that I get different
senses about GAI cooperation. I believe that Austria is afraid of Italy,
but Germany's done a lot to keep Italy from being able to attack Austria,
and Andy's press has gotten more "sensitive" to Austria over time.
So I could believe two things: (1) That Andy wants revenge on Germany or
(2) that Andy wants Germany sufficiently engaged that he can break the
central triple. Both come from the same point of view. I tend to think it's
the latter, and that if Germany does well (means, allies with any of us in
the north) that Andy will settle for a triple he'd rather not be a part of.
This is of course speculation on my part, but it fits with what I've been
hearing from each of GAI.
--- Tzarface
Message from Russia to Austria
>Then it's settle, we leave Galicia alone and rely on the dmz.
Yes. I will also be moving to Bla, but as noted, expect that to bounce.
Come Fall I expect we'll both be looking for our "standard" neutrals -- is
that a reasonable assumption?
In Spring '02 we can look to really coordinate southwards.
Earlier you mentioned that you were hoping Andy was going to Lepanto. Any
sense whether that's going to actually happen? In the early going I would
have guessed that he was going to be defensive (which makes sense given
that you did tell me you were planning to move Tri-Ven) but he hasn't said
much about it since an early message.
I have no idea how things are going to go down in the north. GEF are all
friendly sounding, but none of them have made any commitments that indicate
which way they are leaning. Germany has offered Sweden if we work out Gal
(as you suggested to him and you and I have agreed we will). But I get no
sense of what their longer term leanings are. I get the sense that Germany
is more willing than the rest to be a longer term ally -- given his
"coordination efforts" -- but still don't know which way he's planning to
jump. Maybe everyone is just playing "wait and see".
Anything else we should discuss or coordinate? Early on you said you didn't
want to get into details just yet, and with that and my concern about
Germany's message, I think I haven't spent enough time actually talking
with you about us (rather than about Germany). We've still got some time
before the turn, and I'm happy to discuss anything that needs attention.
--- Tzarface
Message from France to Russia
>
> So I could believe two things: (1) That Andy wants revenge on
> Germany or
> (2) that Andy wants Germany sufficiently engaged that he can
> break the central triple. Both come from the same point of
> view. I tend to think it's the latter, and that if Germany
> does well (means, allies with any of us in the north) that
> Andy will settle for a triple he'd rather not be a part of.
>
Interesting take on the situation, and probably pretty accurate. So, as
long as Germany's isolated, the central triple will fail to form.
Have you tried to pry Austria out of Germany's tricky little grasp? I
don't think he's commited to an AG alliance, just manipulated. I get the
impression that the Germans are essentially stoking his paranoia.
What kind of things has Germany been saying to you? He sends the
occasional anti-English press to me, but I get the feeling that he's not
terribly concerned with me, maybe sees me as a situation to deal with
later.
Erik
Message from Russia to France
Honestly, I haven't been giving Austria enough of my attention. Germany's
manipulations distracted me. (Not a good excuse, but the truth
nonetheless). I've just started stepping up my press to Austria to try to
rectify this situation.
As far as Germany, he's been telling me not to attack Austria, and has
tried to get me to promise not to publicly (to A and I). Not terribly
surprising that he wants to help Austria, but he's really working hard to
make Austria feel comfortable. He's been very active in negotiating down
here, so if he's not active up there, it probably means he's distracted.
--- Tzarface
Message from Austria to Russia
> Yes. I will also be moving to Bla, but as noted, expect that to bounce.
> Come Fall I expect we'll both be looking for our "standard" neutrals -- is
> that a reasonable assumption?
Yes, unless you have something special in mind?
> In Spring '02 we can look to really coordinate southwards.
>
> Earlier you mentioned that you were hoping Andy was going to Lepanto. Any
> sense whether that's going to actually happen? In the early going I would
> have guessed that he was going to be defensive (which makes sense given
> that you did tell me you were planning to move Tri-Ven) but he hasn't said
> much about it since an early message.
In a way, the Lepanto is a defensive maneuver,
so I guess he will open with one.
> I have no idea how things are going to go down in the north. GEF are all
> friendly sounding, but none of them have made any commitments that indicate
> which way they are leaning. Germany has offered Sweden if we work out Gal
> (as you suggested to him and you and I have agreed we will). But I get no
> sense of what their longer term leanings are. I get the sense that Germany
> is more willing than the rest to be a longer term ally -- given his
> "coordination efforts" -- but still don't know which way he's planning to
> jump. Maybe everyone is just playing "wait and see".
That's my guess as well. Everyone is playing it
safe and we may have to wait until 1902 to
really know what's happening.
> Anything else we should discuss or coordinate? Early on you said you didn't
> want to get into details just yet, and with that and my concern about
> Germany's message, I think I haven't spent enough time actually talking
> with you about us (rather than about Germany). We've still got some time
> before the turn, and I'm happy to discuss anything that needs attention.
I assure you that I don't feel you have neglected
me. Contrarily to me, you also have to think
about the north and with good relations between
us, this became your priority. Like I said
previously, I have no problem with your taking
care of the north, as long as you're also available
to take care of the south.
For the moment, I can't think of anything else to
discuss that isn't based on conjecture, so go
ahead and take all the time you need to improve
your position in the north. Anyway, once Turkey
is taken care of, the north will have to be your
path of expansion as part of the RA.
Philippe
Message from England to Russia
Eric -
> >But I don't understand - you are a fan of the Oakland Raiders but
> >not Oakland A's, and the San Francisco Giants but not the San
> >Francisco 49'ers?
>
> It's just a symptom of my larger emotional problems. :)
You know, you seem pretty together, for a Raiders fan. ;o)
> Short life story version relevant to this point: I was an army brat
> in my wee years, family moved to SF, and I watched my first football
> game. It was the Raiders vs. the Steelers. Kid-logic being what it
> is, I decided I liked the Raiders better because they had the cooler
> logo. I only later found that they were a local team. The year that
> happened makes me think that I must have been watching the game that
> ended with the Immaculate Reception, but I really don't remember the
> details that well.
This part I understand completely. I hope you rejoice with me when the
Steelers lose.
> I was much older when I first got interested in baseball, and by then
> we were established in SF. So I went with the Giants. I don't dislike
> the A's, but I'm a fair weather fan. I was a Niner's fan when they
> were a bad team, and was a big fan when they got Montana. Ironically
> as they got better (through the late 80's-early 90's) I got less and
> less supportive of them. Probably envious, if you recall the
> performance of the Raiders over that same time frame.
You did not say "Thank you for Sir Sidney Ponson." I don't know how a
person can root for a team - the A's - who had excellent seats available *at
game time yesterday* for Boston Red Sox fans walking up, to buy at the box
office. I heard a local radio personality say at five minutes to game time
yesterday he bought from the box office at the stadium 2 seats 15 rows up
from the 3d base bag. Unbelievable. Of course the Raiders have similar
problems, but not as bad.
> >I am closely familiar with some Raider frustration in recent
> >years,incidentally. I am from Baltimore. Glad to see Rich Gannon's
> >shoulder's recovered. . .
>
> More galling is that it was Shannon Sharpe who scored the crucial TD!
> I thought we were finally through with him when he left Denver. But
> don't worry, my frustration with Baltimore is way low on the list.
> I'm actually more upset about the "fumble that wasn't" from '77 when
> Denver beat the Raiders in the playoffs.
I am pleased to hear it, in the sense that I worry less about next time I
fly into Oakland. I hope the other members of the Raider Nation have put it
behind them too.
> At least in Baltimore we lost because we were outplayed. Now, mention
> "tuck", and we've got a whole other problem! :)
Yeah, that was something else. That should have been your year. . .
Any idea who we're waiting for? What's up with GAL?
Ben
Message from France to Russia
>
> Honestly, I haven't been giving Austria enough of my attention.
> Germany's
> manipulations distracted me. (Not a good excuse, but the truth
> nonetheless). I've just started stepping up my press to Austria to try
> to
> rectify this situation.
In my experience, the Austrian's been a bit of a pain to work with. He has
certainly been less engaging that I would expect an Austrian player to be
of France. I'm hoping it's just first-turn paranoia. I have been driving
home the "sheesh, sure is rough to be stuck between Andy and Tony" point
to him in hopes that he'll start to re-think any trust that he's built for
those two. If GAI hasn't coallesced by now, we don't ever want it to.
> As far as Germany, he's been telling me not to attack Austria, and has
> tried to get me to promise not to publicly (to A and I). Not terribly
> surprising that he wants to help Austria, but he's really working hard
> to
> make Austria feel comfortable. He's been very active in negotiating down
> here, so if he's not active up there, it probably means he's distracted.
Good to hear. The less Germany worries about England and I, the better. I
know you've got a bounce planned with Turkey; do you have one planned with
Austria, too (sorry if you've told me before -- don't have my saved
messages here)? I thought I'd heard that bandied about earlier, but I'm
not sure if it was just a proposal or conjecture or rumor.
Erik
Message from Russia to France
Erik,
I'm risking a DMZ in Gal rather than a bounce. I'm not sure it's the
right way to go, but that's the current plan.
How about Bur? Do you have a bounce planned there? I should have
asked this earlier, because if you do it'd be an easier call to leave
Gal DMZed.
--- Tzarface
Message from Germany to Russia
I hear you are not bouncing in GAL. I just thought that I would let you know
that due to lack of 3 way communication I have a gut feeling that AT are
allied. England has been informed of the suggested push north by Russia, so
be careful.
Message from France to Russia
> How about Bur? Do you have a bounce planned there? I should have
> asked this earlier, because if you do it'd be an easier call to leave
> Gal DMZed.
It's been discussed. Germany's into it and I think assumes it's a go, but
I'd rather use the unit for actual movement. Austria's bouncing Italy, so
it stands to reason that he'd be fine with DMZ, too. In any case, if I
were you, I might cover with Mos - Ukr just to be safe. If Austria's
bouncing with Italy, it stands to reason that he's either headed for you
or for Turkey, and you might want to be prepared for either alternative.
Just my $.02, though.
Erik
Message from Germany to Russia
Well how are things going, Austria informs me of a no bounce in GAL. Was
wondering what you have to say?
Message from France to Russia
Eric:
As I said, I'm looking more at working with England over Germany in the
near term, but when it comes time to change courses, a lot will hinge on
the situation between you and him. What has your relationship been like
with him to date?
If Germany's the eventual target, I don't think you have to worry about
him attack you up north, but I haven't really been privvy to any
discussions between you, whether through you or him. I know you've been
talking, though. Can I assume that you're building a strong enough rapport
with him that he will leave Scandanavia exposed to you at some point?
I know that's all a little vague, but I'm trying to peer a few years into
the future.
Erik
Message from Russia to Germany
>I hear you are not bouncing in GAL.
Yes, we're back to the DMZ.
>I just thought that I would let you know
>that due to lack of 3 way communication I have a gut feeling that AT are
>allied. England has been informed of the suggested push north by Russia, so
>be careful.
I am concerned about AT as well. Neither A or T have said anything
that implies they are coming after me, but of course, they wouldn't.
Because of that I'll want to keep my units around to defend the
borders should Austria take Gal, Turkey take Arm or a combination of
the two. That also means I won't be going north this season.
Which is just as well, I think. If AT doesn't come to be, I'll be in
a good position to work with one or the other of them, and possibly
build in the north to work on England (if I get builds). I assume
from your earlier messages that if I have the choice you would prefer
me to work with Austria as opposed to Turkey. For now I'll be seeing
how they move before getting too set one way or the other in any case.
Let me know if your preferences change (or if I'm wrong about them),
as I'll definitely keep them in mind -- it'll be easier for us to
cooperate in the north if things in the south are not worrying to you.
--- Tzarface
Message from Germany to Russia
I hear you were inquiring about my bounce in BUR. Ask and I will tell you my
moves.
Message from Germany to all
OK, so here it is. MUN - BUR (agreed bounce with France), KIE - DEN (on
request), BER - KIE. Pretty standard opening I would say. Anyone else like
to share?
Message from Germany to Russia
Our press just crossed. I am just wondering who mentioned the push north to
England. It could have only been Italy, Austria or yourself. I dont see
Italy doing it. That would only leave Austria and you. You would only do it
if you were after me with France or England. Something at this stage which i
doubt. That leaves Austria. If it was him then he mentioned it for a reason.
I will only state what I stated from the beginning. I have never seen
germany move on russia or vice versa.
My main concern is being on the right side on E or F. One of the three
always loses out to the other two.
It was Austria who requested my move to DEN to bounce you if needed. I wont
be moving on SIL, PRU or SWE no matter what you hear. A GR war would spell
disaster for me.
By fall I will be letting you into Sweden and no doubt something will happen
down south.
Message from Russia to Germany
>I hear you were inquiring about my bounce in BUR. Ask and I will tell you my
>moves.
The question (are you bouncing in Bur) really just came up on the
spur of the moment. I only asked because France had asked right
before whether I was going to bounce in Gal, and it seemed only fair
to ask about Bur in return. I really should have asked you the same
question, but when France said you had asked for a bounce, I couldn't
see any reason why he would lie, and so never bothered to follow up
with you.
>Our press just crossed. I am just wondering who mentioned the push north to
>England. It could have only been Italy, Austria or yourself. I dont see
>Italy doing it. That would only leave Austria and you.
Sorry to rob the mystery from the whole thing, but I talked in some
detail with England about the concept of a northern opening. England
asked me if I was going to be opening north, and I told him that I
would not. I told him that was in part because I've had multiple
people ask whether I was considering a northern opening, and I
thought that meant an AT v R was forming.
The point of the statement was to make it clear that no discussions
about a northern opening were going forward. Since -- as I said in my
last press to you -- I've decided not to open north, I didn't see any
problem with being open about it. I thought that this statement plus
my concern about a possible AT, would actually give England more
flexibility to work with you.
To be honest, I didn't think that the fact that people had talked to
me about a northern opening *in concept* would be a big deal -- I
generally assume that my neighbors discuss lots of options, at least
casually, before the first moves. I certainly never said that
anything was planned or coordination.
>You would only do it if you were after me with France or England.
>Something at this stage which i doubt.
I am firmly focused in the south, and on the potential of combatting
an AT. I don't want to see you go down, because you're my only buffer
if that happens. Italy can hound Austria, but you are the only one
with units that can support me.
>That leaves Austria. If it was him then he mentioned it for a reason.
Obviously I cannot speak as to what Austria may have told England. If
we assume an AT alliance is happening, then perhaps he wants England
pressuring me in the north? But again, it could just be what I said.
>My main concern is being on the right side on E or F. One of the three
>always loses out to the other two.
I've gotten the distinct impression from Ben that he's going to play
neutrally early and see how things go. If that's true, you still have
options with him. France I don't have a clear read on, but would
guess he's going to be flexible as well. If there's anything I can do
to help with either E or F, let me know. Especially with E, because
now I feel like I may have caused problems for you!
>I wont be moving on SIL, PRU or SWE no matter what you hear. A GR
>war would spell disaster for me.
And I won't be moving on Sil or Pru, because a GR war is just as bad
for me. Reading this I realize I don't remember accepting your
request for DMZ Boh, so I'll also say yes here. (I never had a
problem with it, but I don't know that I ever agreed to it either.
I'm quite happy with a Boh DMZ, and have no expectation of getting
that far for a while in any case.
Again, I'm sorry if my interactions with England and France have made
you nervous about our relationship. Obviously that was not the intent
in either case.
--- Tzarface
Message from Italy to Russia
Eric,
Galacia will be open if you want it.
Message from Russia to Austria
> > Yes. I will also be moving to Bla, but as noted, expect that to bounce.
> > Come Fall I expect we'll both be looking for our "standard" neutrals -- is
> > that a reasonable assumption?
>
>Yes, unless you have something special in mind?
No, but I wanted to make it clear I'm still available. Especially given
that I thought that I hadn't been adequately focused on RA issues.
>I assure you that I don't feel you have neglected
>me.
Very good to hear.
>For the moment, I can't think of anything else to
>discuss that isn't based on conjecture, so go
>ahead and take all the time you need to improve
>your position in the north. Anyway, once Turkey
>is taken care of, the north will have to be your
>path of expansion as part of the RA.
Yup. And that is indeed what I'm hoping to settle quickly. If what I'm
hearing about AI relations (much of which is from you directly) I expect
that you are anxious to get established and turn on Italy too. I think the
biggest challenge will be taking out Turkey and still leaving us a unit
blend that (1) allows us to cooperate with a comfort zone to turn in
opposite directions and (2) allows you enough fleets to really press Italy
(though I guess you could get help on that from from France). But as you
say, at this point trying to solve the problem would be conjecture. We'll
discuss in more detail as we go along.
>Philippe
Uh-oh. I just realized I owe you apologies for another reason: I've been
referring to you as "Phillipe". I will make a point of getting the spelling
correct in the future!
--- Tzarface
Message from Russia to Italy
Hey Andy,
Thanks for the heads up. For now, I've agreed to a DMZ in Gal. Since
Germany has made Sweden conditional on not violating that DMZ, I won't be
violating it in Spring 01. But I do intend to keep my forces focused south
so that I am able to go against A or T, whichever we choose.
I'm not too worried about deciding on targeting A or T yet, and it sounded
like you are not either. Since we haven't yet seen who's going to stick
their neck out, I think it will pay to be flexible in the very short term.
Once we see how they set up, we can choose a specific target later.
--- Eric
Message from Russia to Turkey
Sultan Jason,
It's been a while so I'm dropping a line. At this point, I've agreed to a
DMZ in Gal with Austria, as Germany made honoring the DMZ a requirement for
getting Swe in Fall. Other than that, there's not a lot going on.
Let me know if there's anything you'd like to go over.
--- Tzarface
Message from Italy to Russia
> I'm not too worried about deciding on targeting A or T yet, and it sounded
> like you are not either. Since we haven't yet seen who's going to stick
> their neck out, I think it will pay to be flexible in the very short term.
> Once we see how they set up, we can choose a specific target later.
I agree completely
Message from Turkey to Russia
Good to hear from you. I think we're set for the spring. Hopefully
everyone will get their orders in and get things going.
jason
Message from Austria to Russia
> Uh-oh. I just realized I owe you apologies for another reason: I've been
> referring to you as "Phillipe". I will make a point of getting the spelling
> correct in the future!
No problem, it's not the worst that I saw. Once, in highschool,
someone wrote fillipe on the black board, and it really was a
mistake! Can't think of a way to spell it worst then that ;-)
Philippe
Message to all
> OK, so here it is. MUN - BUR (agreed bounce with France), KIE - DEN (on
> request), BER - KIE. Pretty standard opening I would say. Anyone else like
> to share?
Can we expect you to keep this up?
Message from Germany to all
<Can we expect you to keep this up?>
Who are 'we'? some of you can some of you cant. Those that expect will
receive ;-)
So, no one else willing to lie.. I mean share their opening moves?
Turkey; just to save on press and answer in this one, the answer is NO.
I will not be asking France and Italy to convoy me to SMY nor will I aid in
any EFI convoy of a Russian unit from STP to CON.
Message from Russia to Austria
>No problem, it's not the worst that I saw. Once, in highschool,
>someone wrote fillipe on the black board, and it really was a
>mistake! Can't think of a way to spell it worst then that ;-)
Well, I considered this in some detail. After much deliberation I
think the absolute worst I can come up with is "Fylleap". :)
--- Tzarface the Ever Helpful
Message from England to all
> I will not be asking France and Italy to convoy me to SMY nor
> will I aid in any EFI convoy of a Russian unit from STP to CON.
My suggestion was for a convoy of a Russian army from NAF to STP, via the
Eastern Med. Please read your press more carefully.
My opening moves are:
F STP/sc - BOT
A MOS - WAR
A WAR - MOS
F SEV - ION
This way I maximize my defensive posture and bounce Italy from the Ionian.
Ben
Message from Russia to Russia
Dear Diary,
Note before the move deadline.
* I'm really not expecting to see anything exciting from G or A for
the Spring moves.
* T is still a mystery.
* My moves have been in without wait for a few days now. Mos is
holding. Because G is not expected to threaten me, Mos H gives me
more flexibility to defend if T goes to Arm, and is just as good as A
War if Austria goes into Gal.
* I'm a little concerned about A long term, because he seems very
blaze (relaxed, not on fire) about the discussion of hitting Turkey,
especially given his concern about Andy, which would make RI
something else to fear. I don't feel like I'm making much progress
there, since one of G or A needs to fall for me to have a stable
position.
* Either Germany reacted quickly to my concerns, or I just overreacted to him.
* EF sounds like it's happening, though from what I'm hearing from F,
I'm wondering if Andy isn't trying to oversell it. While I still
don't mind seeing an EF, I probably should try to leave Germany some
room to maneuver in case I need a GR somewhere down the line. Then
again, him being in trouble could make Philippe feel more secure with
RA. Hard one to gauge. (This is why I tend to be reactionary in the
early game).
* I realized shortly after sending the press to Ben that naming G
specifically was a potential mistake. I was in a snit (due to outside
of game issues) and didn't think it through before sending. When
Germany raised the issue I thought about trying to deny I said
anything, but in the end decided it would be better to just end the
suspicion. The last thing I want is Tony out investigating me,
because bound to hear bad things about me if he's listening for them,
whether it's the thing I did or something else. It's a shame it
happened at the same time I asked Erik about Bur, since I'd think
that makes it look more suspicious. Hopefully I can rebuild that
bridge (if damaged) quickly, especially if the EF forms.
* Overall, feeling a little calmer at this point. Nothing is
obviously horrid right now. Not clear that anything is settled
anywhere, and I am a paranoid pessimist at heart. But think I can
count on F and I for the short term, and hope that gets me through
the game opening. I am a little worried that when I become
unavailable next week that I may lose valuable negotiation mind share.
--- Eric
Austria: Army Budapest → Serbia
Austria: Fleet Trieste → Venice (*bounce*)
Austria: Army Vienna → Budapest
England: Fleet Edinburgh → Norwegian Sea
England: Army Liverpool → Yorkshire
England: Fleet London → North Sea
France: Fleet Brest → Mid-Atlantic Ocean
France: Army Marseilles → Piedmont
France: Army Paris → Gascony
Germany: Army Berlin → Kiel
Germany: Fleet Kiel → Denmark
Germany: Army Munich → Ruhr
Italy: Fleet Naples → Ionian Sea
Italy: Army Rome → Apulia
Italy: Army Venice HOLD
Russia: Army Moscow HOLD
Russia: Fleet Sevastopol → Black Sea (*bounce*)
Russia: Fleet St Petersburg (south coast) → Gulf of Bothnia
Russia: Army Warsaw → Ukraine
Turkey: Fleet Ankara → Black Sea (*bounce*)
Turkey: Army Constantinople → Bulgaria
Turkey: Army Smyrna → Armenia
|